The sad thing is that if pro-transit folks did this sort of thing, it would absolutely be paraded around as an excuse to discredit the entire pro-transit position and kill the proposal by default, but when classists/NIMBYs/car-brains engage in blatant bad faith they’re never collectively punished for it in the same way.
The side trying to make positive change is always held to a higher double standard than the side trying to maintain the status quo.
In a way positive change double standard might be a protection against corruption, because if the positive change isn’t even able to withstand scrutiny how is the change planning to be kept up. I’m not arguing for it, I just assume that this is one of the reasons it is there (and status quo bias of course).
The sad thing is that if pro-transit folks did this sort of thing, it would absolutely be paraded around as an excuse to discredit the entire pro-transit position and kill the proposal by default, but when classists/NIMBYs/car-brains engage in blatant bad faith they’re never collectively punished for it in the same way.
The side trying to make positive change is always held to a higher double standard than the side trying to maintain the status quo.
In a way positive change double standard might be a protection against corruption, because if the positive change isn’t even able to withstand scrutiny how is the change planning to be kept up. I’m not arguing for it, I just assume that this is one of the reasons it is there (and status quo bias of course).